There's a fine line between being courageous and reckless.
Act leader David Seymour is reaping the rewards for being a politician of one or the other ilk.
He is certainly an MP with a large dose of chutzpah who loves nothing better than being the outlier.
He is the "it" leader of the moment.
He celebrated his party's relative success in Tuesday's Colmar Brunton poll by sky diving near Twizel, ostensibly to support the tourism industry but possibly just because he is fearless.
Act's surge in support would deliver nine Act MPs, instead of the solitary MP the public has returned for the past three elections.
Whether that support lasts to election day and translates to votes is another matter.
He serves as reminder there is nothing predictable about voter preferences.
Seymour has been the dutiful custodian of the party's skeletal presence for the past six years in Parliament but has been mocked or ignored through many of those years.
So what's changed and what are the dangers of rising too fast?
There are several factors behind Seymour's rise: The man himself and the freak circumstances he finds himself in.
He has always been a funny guy with a self-deprecating sense of humour.
He has built a three-dimensional profile through light and serious issues (Dancing with the Stars and euthanasia).
He is a smart guy and public policy nerd whose intellect is often hidden by his humour. He leads a party of policy purists - small government and personal choice and liberty being at its core. There is never any doubt what his party's position should be on any issue.
That was evident this week when he quickly and clearly bagged Jacinda Ardern's desire to change hate speech laws as an attack on free speech. National waffled.
It was the same during the Covid crisis over issues that tore National inside out. National had a lot to lose by choosing the wrong tone on the wrong issues at a time of heightened nationalism.
Seymour had nothing to lose and, being a party of one, no one to argue with him.
He is a personable guy with a clear message.
He deliberately marginalised himself in Parliament over gun law reform and the Zero Carbon law. But he has also demonstrated an ability to work constructively across the political spectrum on his End of Life Choice bill.
He has undoubtedly picked up some disaffected support from NZ First and National.
But Judith Collins' campaign for National picked up energy and momentum this week which could put a lid on Act's rise, if not reverse it. The next week before early voting begins will be crucial.
The centre-right is not a tension-free zone; Seymour took exception to Collins' claim that it was Act's job to take out New Zealand First's vote.
It certainly reinforced the perception there is not enough cohesion or numbers on the centre right to form a government.
But that matters less to supporters of small parties.
Seymour has built small constituencies and been a magnet for the marginalised, the disgruntled and sometimes rabid voter that is not necessarily looking for a voice in government but just a voice.
Seymour now proudly claims that Act is a party for the marginalised.
That brings with it dangers. In the unlikely event he ends up with nine MPs, history suggests at least one will spectacularly demonstrate an unsuitability to politics.
Fast rises can often lead to disastrous falls.